Agfa Copex Rapid advice please

[Alan Johnson]

the "designated" developer, Spur Modular UR, is not available for sale in the US

It was replaced by Spur SL-N ,which is available from here:

Spur Dokuspeed SL-N | 100ml Part A + 75ml Part B

SPUR Dokuspeed SL-N Modular developer Part A - Part B – is a new kind of modular developer kit for all high-resolution document films. You can…

www.macodirect.de

SPUR Dokuspeed SL-N Part A and Part B for 10 films - fotoimpex.com analogue photography

[TAB:GPSR] Manufacturer: SPUR Photochemie Schmiedestraße 31 DE-52379 Langerwehe schain@spur-photo.com Weitere Hinweise zur Produktsicherheit: [PSIMG:GHS07.png] Acute Tox. ...

www.fotoimpex.com

Being a low volume product it is not inexpensive.

 

[aparat]

It was replaced by Spur SL-N ,which is available from here:

Spur Dokuspeed SL-N | 100ml Part A + 75ml Part B

SPUR Dokuspeed SL-N Modular developer Part A - Part B – is a new kind of modular developer kit for all high-resolution document films. You can…

www.macodirect.de

SPUR Dokuspeed SL-N Part A and Part B for 10 films - fotoimpex.com analogue photography

[TAB:GPSR] Manufacturer: SPUR Photochemie Schmiedestraße 31 DE-52379 Langerwehe schain@spur-photo.com Weitere Hinweise zur Produktsicherheit: [PSIMG:GHS07.png] Acute Tox. ...

www.fotoimpex.com

Being a low volume product it is not inexpensive.

Thank you! I have seen it on their website, but, unfortunately, I am based in the US, so it would make the purchase very expensive, too expensive for a single test. But I do appreciate your information. Photographers Formulary in the US, does seem to have a liquid developer, specifically formulated for Technical Pan and similar films here. Have you ever used it?

@relistan These are beautiful!

@Donald Qualls Thank you! I have search through Photrio for a family of curves for the Copex Rapid and found none. I searched through other photography websites, with the same result. I've found some talk about what the curves look like but no actual plots. I must either not be searching well or maybe links to those images went dead a log time ago. Do you know of any source of curves for this film?

 

[relistan]

@relistan These are beautiful!

He has done really nice work with it. I bought some CMS 20 II just to test with POTA after seeing his results.

 

[Alan Johnson]

I am still questioning (to myself) the point of testing a document film as a pictorial film. Forcing a film not designed to give a pictorial curve into getting one seems like an exercise in futility to me. I do get that it can be done, but it seems like a rather esoteric use case. Already few people see the benefit of film tests and characteristic curve analysis, how many are going to even look at the results of a document-film-forced-to-look-like-a-pictorial-film test? I need to think about this some more, unless you can convince me that it's a good idea.

Sorry to harp on this, but I need to be certain before I start testing it.

I have tried Adox CMS 20 and Copex Rapid. On Flickr Pro they can be shared in high resolution:

 

[relistan]

I have tried Adox CMS 20 and Copex Rapid. On Flickr Pro they can be shared in high resolution:

Nice, Alan!

 

[Donald Qualls]

Do you know of any source of curves for this film?

Not for pictorial development. In the original development, they have the same kind of curve you'd see on other document films used for microfilm etc. -- a very short, very steep section in between nearly flat toe and shoulder.

 

[Auer]

I guess I'm on my own with my original post question.

"Currently have Rodinal, HC-110, D76 and D96 available.
Will any of these work? Anyone used any of these with this film?"

 

[Donald Qualls]

As I posted back up thread, I've gotten okay results with Rodinal at 1:100 and, IIRC, semi-stand. Don't recall the time or EI I used, but if you kept the link to the Wayback Machine copy of my old developers page, it should be there.

I see HC-110 listed with Copex Rapid on the Massive Dev Chart, too -- but showing as "high contrast" at 1:80. They also list time and EI for Rodinal 1:100.

 

[aparat]

I guess I'm on my own with my original post question.

"Currently have Rodinal, HC-110, D76 and D96 available.
Will any of these work? Anyone used any of these with this film?"

I feel your pain

I have also tried to find out if a general-purpose developer can be used. Since I cannot locate any existing curves for the Copex Rapid, I think it would be interesting to test the film and get a family of curves to examine. So far, people have recommended either esoteric home brews or expensive special-purpose developers available in Europe only. I am probably going to try POTA, which can be mixed up from common photographic chemicals. I know it is not ideal, but I guess it'll have to do. I might also try Photographers Formulary TD-3 Techpan Developer, which sells for around $16 + shipping, but at least it's available for sale in the U.S.

@Donald Qualls I will take those non-pictorial curves. Do you have a link? At least that will be a reference to compare against.

 

[relistan]

I guess I'm on my own with my original post question.

"Currently have Rodinal, HC-110, D76 and D96 available.
Will any of these work? Anyone used any of these with this film?"

I feel your pain

I have also tried to find out if a general-purpose developer can be used. Since I cannot locate any existing curves for the Copex Rapid, I think it would be interesting to test the film and get a family of curves to examine. So far, people have recommended either esoteric home brews or expensive special-purpose developers available in Europe only. I am probably going to try POTA, which can be mixed up from common photographic chemicals. I know it is not ideal, but I guess it'll have to do. I might also try Photographers Formulary TD-3 Techpan Developer, which sells for around $16 + shipping, but at least it's available for sale in the U.S.

@Donald Qualls I will take those non-pictorial curves. Do you have a link? At least that will be a reference to compare against.

The post I made near the very beginning of the thread shows amazing results (not mine) in Clayton F76+ very diluted. This is a general purpose developer that is like a phenidone version of D-76.

Presumably you could get similar results with a very dilute D-76.

 

[fs999]

I have nearly no grain with CMS20 II and Caffenol CL-CN (or LC+CNew from Philippe May's site)

Plaubel Makina 67 • Nikkor 1:2.8/80
Adox CMS II 20 ISO film in homemade Caffenol CLCN 16min @ 20°C
Scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 at 2400dpi with Silverfast AI Studio

Avignon • Vaucluse • Provence • France



Caffenol CLCN
500 ml Filtered Water
5gr Anhydrous Washing Soda
1gr Vitamin C
6gr Instant coffee ("Winny")
60 sec. slow agitations then 3 times every 3 minutes for 15 minutes, fixing 60 sec.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I have nearly no grain with CMS20 II and Caffenol CL-CN (or LC+CNew from Philippe May's site)

Exactly. Copex Rapid is very similar to CMS 20 (or CMS 20 II) only about 1 1/3 stop faster.

 

[Donald Qualls]

@Donald Qualls I will take those non-pictorial curves. Do you have a link? At least that will be a reference to compare against.

I don't have a link. I've seen a comparison between microfilm stock curve and "normal" film/developer curve somewhere, but it's been quite a while and I don't recall where it was. Pretty sure it was before I tried microfilm the first time myself, which was 2003.

 

[aparat]

I don't have a link. I've seen a comparison between microfilm stock curve and "normal" film/developer curve somewhere, but it's been quite a while and I don't recall where it was. Pretty sure it was before I tried microfilm the first time myself, which was 2003.

No worries. I couldn't find any curves, either. By the way, since the Copex Rapid is similar to CMS 20 II, how about this developer: Adox Adotech CMS IV Black and White Film Developer
It is available for sale in Europe and the US, and is fairly affordable. If you guys okay it, I will use it to test both Copex Rapid and CMS 20 II.

 

[fs999]

Exactly. Copex Rapid is very similar to CMS 20 (or CMS 20 II) only about 1 1/3 stop faster.

Similar but not the same : CMS 20 is Agfa-Gevaert Copex HDP (until this year know as EPM ImageLink HD) and Agfa Copex Rapid is Agfa-Gevaert Cope Copex Rapid A.H.U. (Anti Halation Underlayer) (EPM Imagelink HS).

 

[Donald Qualls]

Similar but not the same :

Similar enough that the same developers will work well with both, in my experience. Yes, @aparat you should be fine with any developer recommended for CMS 20 II on Copex Rapid, though (if you weren't testing for this anyway) you'd have to find the correct time to give the required contrast as well as determining the effective EI.

 

[fs999]

Similar enough that the same developers will work well with both, in my experience.

But not for CL-CN (LC+CNew). The recipe is not same, timing is not the same and agitation scheme is not the same.

 

[Donald Qualls]

But not for CL-CN (LC+CNew). The recipe is not same, timing is not the same and agitation scheme is not the same.

I don't follow -- a low contrast Caffenol ought to work with both CMS 20 II and Copex Rapid. Yes, times will be different, as is generally the case with different B&W emulsions in the same developer. Agitation can be varied, among other things, to trade off speed increase from longer process against contrast. But it sounds like you're saying you need to vary the actual formula between them?

 

[fs999]

But it sounds like you're saying you need to vary the actual formula between them?

Yes. Amount of instant coffee changes, time changes and agitation scheme changes.
I found the recipe on Philippe may's site.

I don't know if Rollei ATP 1.1 is still available...

 

[Donald Qualls]

Amount of instant coffee changes, time changes and agitation scheme changes.

And Copex Rapid, CMS 20 II, and Rollei ATP 1.1 (and, from my experience, Imagelink and Fuji HR and HS stocks) can all use the CL-CN 6g variant. I've done all of those (except my CMS 20 was the original and I've never heard of Rollei ATP 1.1 until now) in the same LC+C with fine results. IMO, this would be like varying the metol content of D-76 for Delta 400 vs. Tri-X -- possible, but why?

 

[Auer]

I'm going in the opposite direction I guess, as I'm trying to figure out how to develop Copex Rapid rapidly.

I have no inclination to do the coffee brews and look for a dev time at 8-9 minutes max if possible.

I will mess more with D96 this weekend, maybe.

 

[relistan]

I'm going in the opposite direction I guess, as I'm trying to figure out how to develop Copex Rapid rapidly.

I have no inclination to do the coffee brews and look for a dev time at 8-9 minutes max if possible.

I will mess more with D96 this weekend, maybe.

You have D-76, right? Why not try it diluted as I suggested a few times? Ron E. Marks' shots are still the best looking I've seen in his diluted F-76+ . Obviously you should do what makes the most sense for you. But it really seems worth a try.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If you can get consistent, even development, it ought to be possible to get the needed low contrast with a very short dunk in pretty much any ordinary developer -- Xtol stock, Rodinal 1:25, etc. There was a thread not long ago about using stock strength Dektol for film with dev times in the range of 1 minute.

I don't think I could manage that even with a Paterson Super System 4, but if you develop in open tanks in the dark, it ought to be possible to develop for as little as a minute with constant agitation and get even processing. Obviously, I'd need to test with the film to get the contrast right, but based on the dilution, I'd probably start with something like 1:30 or 2:00 in Xtol stock.

 

[aparat]

I'm going in the opposite direction I guess, as I'm trying to figure out how to develop Copex Rapid rapidly.

I have no inclination to do the coffee brews and look for a dev time at 8-9 minutes max if possible.

I will mess more with D96 this weekend, maybe.

If you can wait a few weeks, I am planning to test the Copex Rapid in commercially available developers. Please, keep an eye on this thread. I will be posting my results there.

 

[Auer]

You have D-76, right? Why not try it diluted as I suggested a few times? Ron E. Marks' shots are still the best looking I've seen in his diluted F-76+ . Obviously you should do what makes the most sense for you. But it really seems worth a try.

Yes I do, and will try it next time I mix up a batch. Using whats ready now first tho.